Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
Koduri Suresh Babu - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Telangana and Others - Respondents
W.P. No. 7302 of 2021
Decided On : 04-07-2023
REVENUE RECOVERY ACT - DIET SUPPLY CONTRACT - SHOW CAUSE NOTICE - DIET INDENTS - EXPLANATION - JOINT VERIFICATION - NATURAL JUSTICE - PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE - INTERIM ORDER - COERCIVE STEPS - LIABILITY - DETERMINATION OF LIABILITY - WRIT PETITION - COSTS - MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS - CLOSURE OF MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS - WRIT PETITION ALLOWED - NO ORDER AS TO COSTS - ACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW - CONFORMITY WITH PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE - DETERMINATION OF LIABILITY AGAINST PETITIONER.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, a diet supplier for Niloufer Hospital, challenged the action of the Superintendent of the hospital in writing a letter to the District Collector to initiate recovery proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act without providing diet indents and following due procedure. The petitioner had been issued a show cause notice for alleged misappropriation of funds, but had not been provided with all the necessary documents to submit an explanation. The petitioner had also requested a joint verification of all day-to-day diet indents for the period in question, but this request had not been granted.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the impugned order passed by the Superintendent was contrary to the spirit of the court's earlier interim order, which had directed the respondents not to take coercive steps against the petitioner. The court also found that the Superintendent had not followed due procedure under law and had violated the principles of natural justice by unilaterally fixing liability against the petitioner without providing an opportunity for the petitioner to submit an explanation.
Issues: 1. Whether the Superintendent's action in writing to the District Collector to initiate recovery proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act without providing diet indents and following due procedure was legal and valid. 2. Whether the Superintendent had violated the principles of natural justice by unilaterally fixing liability against the petitioner without providing an opportunity for the petitioner to submit an explanation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Superintendent's action was illegal and invalid, and that the Superintendent had violated the principles of natural justice. The court relied on the following principles of law: * The principles of natural justice require that a person be given an opportunity to be heard before a decision is made that affects their rights. * A person cannot be held liable for a debt without being given an opportunity to defend themselves. * A public authority cannot act arbitrarily or capriciously.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and set aside the impugned order passed by the Superintendent. The court also directed the respondents not to take coercive steps against the petitioner, but allowed them to proceed in the matter afresh in accordance with law and in conformity with the principles of natural justice.
ORDER :
Heard Mr. K. M. Krishna Reddy the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the Learned Government Pleader for Medical Health and Family Welfare.
2. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 6th respondent in Writing a letter vide Rc.No.SPL/PLG/NH/2020/1544 dated 25.11.2020 without furnishing the diet indents and without following any procedure contemplated under law as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 6th respondent to provide diet indents to the petitioner by setting aside the letter vide Rc.No.SPL/PLG/NH/2020/1544 dated 25.11.2020.
3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows:
a) Petitioner has been in the service of Diet Supply for the last 20 years and had been supplying diet to the doctors and in-patients.
b) Petitioner participated in the bidding for the diet supply for Niloufer Hospital and was awarded the diet supply contract for a period of 2 years i.e., from 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2019 and has entered into agreement with Hyderabad District Diet Management Committee and Diet Management Committee on 01.04.2017 and has been supplying diet in Niloufer Hospital.
c) A Writ Petition Public Interest Litigation (WP PIL) 149 of 2020 has been filed against the petitioner, before this court for alleged illegalities in diet supply in Niloufer Hospital. This Court vide its order had directed the respondents to conduct an enquiry in both the Gandhi Hospital and Chest Hospital. This Court on 19.08.2020 directed the 1st respondent to take action in accordance to law.
d) The Enquiry against the petitioner has been conducted behind the back of the petitioner and no notice has been given to the petitioner in the enquiry.
e) The Superintendent, Niloufer Hospital, Red Hills, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad (6th Respondent herein), had issued show cause notice vide Rc.No.SPL/PLG/NH/2020/1258 dated 29.09.2020 directed the petitioner to remit an amount of Rs. 1,13,28,320/- (One Crore Thirteen Lakhs Twenty Eight Thousand Three Hundred and Twenty only) and further to submit explanation to the show cause notice within 7 days.
f) The petitioner vide letter dated 06.10.2020 had requested, the Superintendent, Niloufer Hospital, Red Hills, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad (6th respondent herein), to provide the Enquiry report and all other documents verified by the Enquiry Committee for submitting explanation to the Show cause notice and the 6th respondent has served the copy of enquiry findings.
g) Again the petitioner, vide letter dated 30.10.2020 requested to provide the details of the basis for findings of the enquiry report for submitting explanation. The 6th respondent vide letter dated 16.11.2020 asked the petitioner to submit explanation.
h) Petitioner brought to the notice of the 6th respondent that information sought by the petitioner has not been considered and requested for the basis of the findings of the Enquiry Committee vide letter dated 18.11.2020 and on the same day, the 6th respondent had served some diet indents to the petitioner.
i) Upon verification of the served diet indents, it was found by the petitioner that the Enquiry Committee had not verified all the day to day indents issued by the hospital wards. Petitioner immediately addressed a letter to the 6th respondent on 27.11.2020 bringing the said lacuna to the notice and requested for a joint verification of all day to day diet indents for a period of 3 years and further requested to verify and provide the balance diet indents for submitting explanation.
j) The petitioner again on 28.01.2021 addressed a letter to 6th respondent, reminding about the earlier letters and also requested to provide the balance diet indents for submitting explanation to the Show Cause Notice dated 29.09.2020 but there was no response from the 6th respondent.
k) Respondents are not empowered to initiate action under the Revenue Recovery Act and that the 6t
AI
A public authority cannot act arbitrarily or capriciously and must follow due procedure under law and the principles of natural justice.
: Service – Punishment - once the charges levelled against the delinquent employee are proved then it is for the appointing authority to decide as to what punishment should be imposed on the delinque....
The tribunal upheld the recovery orders against an employee for alleged misconduct, affirming the authority to impose penalties under administrative control and determining adequate opportunity for d....
The termination of a service agency without notice and opportunity for explanation violates natural justice and established guidelines regarding procedural fairness.
Post-retirement disciplinary proceedings on unverified pseudonymous complaint, ignoring guidelines and contradicting inquiry findings, quashed; retiral benefits not withholdable without proving serio....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
